The dock for TV output doesn't matter - NS is a tablet with attached gaming controls. Problem - it's NOT a tablet the way we know a normal tablet. Instead, it uses a home console software... in a tablet. Note that currently it has nothing - no YouTube, no web browser, no icons, no apps, nothing. Just a minimal interface for games.

Before its release on March, I though it would bring an interface much like iOS or Android, with an e-Shop working much like that... offering apps and mini-games. If you ask me, the home console software-like seems an hardware protection, like the Big N always do - only proprietary software, or licensed games. Well, the NS e-shop policies look quite different, but perhaps this thing will change in the future.

There's no way of comparing it with a PS4 or XBOX One, never. Graphics and sound will always be a few steps down. I believe that the initial (big) sales is a consequence of the... "brand new" features, or perhaps just "a new console" curiosity. Yes, it's kinda early to take any conclusions... but I really wonder about the future of this... mobile(?), home console(?), handheld(?) thing. The hardware is modular for proper fix and replacements, but the main chip isn't a powerful one.

I'm still on hold. The game I would like to see is Mario Odyssey, or... "Odd-say" I would say "WOW" if a Metroid game would pop up in the next months. For my best, it wouldn't be like Prime, but... much like Fusion or Zero due to the hardware/gameplay methods/experience.

NS is a tablet with attached gaming controls. Problem - it's NOT a tablet the way we know a normal tablet. Instead, it uses a home console software... in a tablet.

That seems to be the popular thing now though; just look at the Surface. (which coincidentally also starts with an "S". ) People found out that iPads and Android tablets weren't any more useful than their phones, and, as a result, iPad sales have been declining even though Microsoft and now Nintendo are doing just fine with their tablet-but-not-a-tablet hardware. It's made me happy; my school, which has gotten only Apple technology for the last couple of years, has started getting Surfaces for all the teachers instead of iPads and MacBooks. The guy in charge of all the computer hardware at the school (I'm his assistant) wanted to get Chromebooks for the middle school students, but I'm convincing him to use the 7-13 year old (no joke) Dell laptops all the teachers had instead. However all the ones I've seen have an at least 1.6GHz single core processor and a 512GB HDD with 1GB of RAM. The computer weighs 100 pounds and is as thick as an encyclopedia, but the really cool thing about it is everything has an access port from the outside; there's one for the ram (with two sockets, one is just unused), the hard drive, and even the CPU which appeared to be in a socket instead of soldered (and of course has a disc drive and other weird crap like a Compact Flash socket and a 1493 port and other stuff rarely used now). While the specs are comparable to a Chromebook in of themselves, everything is upgradeable; an extra stick of ram and an SDD will still cost less than the cheapest Chromebook.

Yeah, I got off topic, but if you haven't noticed, I found it humorous that 10 year old laptops (although I imagine good for the time) would be just as powerful as Chromebooks made in 2017. I remember seeing the build quality for one and was horrified; the hinges keeping the screen on the Chromebook were completely made of plastic. Never, out of any laptop I've taken apart, (although only being about 10 and only HP or Dell) have I not seen any metal in the hinges. I'd be afraid to open the damn thing.

Zepper wrote:

sound will always be a few steps down.

Sound? There have been no (noticeable) improvements in sound since the sixth console generation.

Zepper wrote:

Graphics

I think it's about half as powerful. To anyone who doesn't know about hardware, that seems huge, as in one console generation to another, but the is only about as large as 60fps to 30fps or 1080p to 720p. I don't like it, but as I said in the other thread, anything they could have done would have increased the price, assuming the profit margin is the same, which I already think must be pretty high (although nowhere near Apple level), or increased the size, assuming the charge will last at least as long. If the thing were twice as thick and $100 more expensive (discreet GPU and more cooling; Tegra X2 would have provided only marginal gain), I bet you could have gotten that much power, but it would make less business sense. Many of the people who bought it because it looked "neato" and was fairly inexpensive would have been put-off by it, enough so that I doubt the amount of extra customers from having more powerful hardware would be able to offset this. A lot of people normally concerned with specs bought it anyway but just said "I wish it was more powerful". Here's a shining example:

About games, I'm going to get this thing for Splatoon 2 no matter what, but I don't see the point in getting it now. (At the point it comes out, there should be a sufficient number of games and I'll be out of school so I can actually play them.) I would say "WOW" if a new F-Zero was released, but you know the likelihood of that...

I'm not sure how that works though, the Gamecube sold about 22 million, slightly behind Xbox's 24 million which was considered a success. I know that at least the Xbox was sold for below the manufacturing price.And comparing with console sales in the eighties, the PC Engine sold 10 million, and was considered a great success (second place after Famicom in Japan during the 8-bit era) and was able to compete with the Mega Drive and SNES for a while in the 16-bit era, thanks to its CD capabilities.

The Wii U was sold for below manufacturing price at least in Europe and USA I think, and still only had sold 14 million 2016 despite having good launch sales, so I bet that hurt them too.

I don't think these failures hurt Nintendo that much though, considering the great successes with DS (154 million) and Wii (102 million), and the 3DS is doing very well too despite it having a slow launch.

Uh, what does this even mean? And yes, that is "Rich from ReviewTechUSA". He can be a bit of an idiot, but he's never biased, which is more than what I can say for 99% of "gaming" YouTube channels. Sometimes, it's also fun to participate in a "discussion" in the comment section of one of his videos... (For example, someone claimed the Switch "is worth like 15 dollars max" and which someone else replied by saying their mom is worth 15 dollars max. Great stuff, right? )

One thing they seemed to miss was the toe-dip into augmented reality. There's that infrared camera, and there was that patent on a VR headset. But who'd want to play with a headset with frame rates and resolutions like that? It's the same problem as with virtual boy, which is why i think they took another route somewhere during market planning and design.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum